Anil Kumar Agarwal vs RAM SHANKAR TRIPATHI

THIS is an appeal against the judgment and order dated 4.2.1993 passed by District Forum, Hardoi in Complaint Case No. 262 of 1992.

A complaint case was filed before the learned District Forum by the respondent with the allegation that after having obtained a ticket in Bus No. UP 30/0290 on 6.1.1992 while travelling from Lucknow to Hardoi, he was not allowed any seat and even the passengers double to its capacity were accommodated in the bus, due to which trouble started in his legs and when the complaint book was demanded, the complainant was visited with filthy languages which caused him mental pain and stress. Subsequently a claim for compensation of Rs. 5,000/- was prayed. In support of his claim the complainant filed on affidavit. In the written statement the appellant/opposite party took up the pleas that the complainant did not travel in the bus in question nor his case is proved and even the plea of lack of territorial jurisdiction was taken.

The learned District Forum vide the impugned order allowed the complaint of the complainant.

AGGRIEVED of the same, the present appeal has been preferred. When the case was called out on 13.4.2004 both the parties were absent.

THE appeal being of the year 1993 and being of the view that there was no justification for the parties and the learned Counsel for being absent, it was thought necessary to decide the matter on merit. Accordingly records were perused. In the memo of appeal the order of compensation of Rs. 2,000/- was criticised on the ground that the complainant had utterly failed to prove that he was travelling by bus and there was any mental stress caused to him. The order of the Forum was also criticised on the ground that without appreciating the evidence of the appellant the impugned order was passed and even the plea of territorial jurisdiction was taken. As far as the plea of lack of territorial jurisdiction is concerned, a reference to Section 11(2) of the Consumer Protection Act is necessary. In view of Section 11(2)(c) complaint can be instituted in a District Forum within the local limits of whose jurisdiction the cause of action wholly or in part arises. The specific case of the complainant is that he after purchasing the ticket was travelling from Lucknow to Hardoi in appellant''s bus No. UP 32/0290. The averments with regard to the physical pain and mental stress have been taken subsequently. Any place in between Lucknow and Hardoi would be the territorial jurisdiction with the local limits of the jurisdiction of the District Forum. In the instant case the complaint has been filed in the District Forum, Hardoi and consequently the District Forum has jurisdiction. The contradictory plea does not survive.

HOWEVER, on merits the finding recorded by the learned District Forum are not sustainable. It is not the case of the complainant that the conductor/driver of bus in question in which he was travelling had ever assured that in case the ticket would be purchased, a seat will be reserved. In case the complainant was of the view that the bus was overloaded, he should not have exercised the option of travelling by the same bus. He should have left the said bus in question or before purchasing a ticket, he should have obtained an assurance that in case the ticket was purchased, he would be given a seat. The bus in question is over-loaded or not cannot be a subject matter of criticism by the complainant. It is for the competent authorities to ensure as to whether the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act have been violated..... More so, there is no document to justify that the complainant was travelling by the same bus.

THE sole affidavit contains the allegation of use of filthy language on demand of complaint book which has no legal substance. THE allegation of having been caused bodily pain is not supported by any documents. THE order obviously of awarding compensation of Rs. 2,000/- against the appellant is uncalled for and in liable to set aside. ORDER THE appeal is allowed. THE judgment and order dated 4.2.1993 of District Forum, Hardoi in Complaint Case No. 262 of 1992 is set aside and the complaint is dismissed. However, in the circumstances the parties are directed to bear their own costs. Appeal allowed.